Terror War: Complicity and Responsibility
We tend to define terrorism as an action or practice that leads us to the moral assessment of terrorism. However, moral interpretation of terrorism appears to be incomplete because terrorism exceeds the moral boundaries and reveals itself primarily as a political issue. Terrorism as a phenomenon of political life should be understood in terms of political philosophy. In this context, the question of participants and accomplices of terrorism becomes fundamentally important. The article focuses on this problem, solving which we would be able to construct a more complete notion of terrorism and answer the question of responsibility, which arises in connection with terrorism.
The article deals with F. Kafka’s attitude to the First World War, reflected in his letters, diaries and prose.
The legitimacy of NATO’s war against Serbia in March 1999 has been widely debated. In the previous chapter, Carl Ceulemans concludes that justice is on the side of NATO’s military campaign. But his analysis is not the only one possible within the framework of Just War Theory. In the following, a different analysis is presented. It shows that while operating within the framework of Just War Theory one can arrive at quite different conclusions from his.
The article touches approach of the modern Islamic legal thought to the Islamic state and caliphate. The author explains the fundamental principles if Islamic concept of the power (caliphate) and points out that this concept was gradually deviating from real political practice. The caliphate itself remained as a political institution till the collapse of the Ottoman Empire after the World War I. After emergence of Islamic State of Iraq and Levant (ISIL) the caliphate converted to concrete political project. In June 2014 ISIL which changed its name to become “Islamic State” (IS) declared creation of caliphate. In practice the Shariat implementation in IS comes to mass killings, forcing nonmuslims to adopt Islam, interference into internal life of Muslim states and terror attacks. The modern Islamic legal thought criticizes IS severely stressing on its violence of religious postulates and Shariat provisions.
Collection of articles is based on materials RUSO Conference October 26, 2013 and primarily focuses on different aspects of origin , course and consequences of the First World War. We investigate the approaching of the war , its relation in Russian and foreign historiography , problems of international relations of the era , the situation in the army and navy. The second major unit materials collection associated with the history of the Great Patriotic War. Considered moral questions of the political climate in the Soviet Union before and at the beginning of this war, the economy , the activities of individual units. Again referred to the exploits of heroes Panfilov . The collection also has special film Prutian campaign in 1711 , Russia's participation in the anti-Napoleonic wars , as well as a number of other problems of Russian history is closely connected with the history of some foreign countries . The collection is intended primarily for historians - researchers, university professors, as well as for all those interested in domestic history of modern and contemporary .
In the Social Science, as different from the history of ideas, the steady preconception of viewing Hobbes as the philosopher who considered human to be a rational and selfish being exists. Such human beings in their natural condition set the war of all against all, but only the strong power can preserve them in the condition of peace. However true Hobbesian views as to the human relationships have almost nothing in common with these trivial suggestion. The article deals with some aspects of Hobbesian anthropology and his doctrine of the virtue. It is argued that the social order is represented by Hobbes as very agile and complex in its structure. At the first glance his philosophy could seem very legible and solely constructivist, designed as the triumph of coherence and implacable logic. At depth - it is not even contradictory, but the terrain of the questions without any answers.
Hobbesian philosophy holds the attention of the researches up to now. The most discussable questions are the following ones: 1. Whether the philosophy of Hobbes is to be considered in relation to his physics and metaphysics or it is an autonomous area of contemplation? 2. Is the philosophy of Hobbes immanently intelligible, as a system of interrelated suppositions or it is to be interpreted out of the historical context of his published works? 3. Is his bellum omnium contra omnes merely an intellectual construction or this notion can be referred to the historical and universal facts of social life design?